/ c f c / l r"' t COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF LOS ANGELES HOLLYWOOD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT CCS- o r 3 D / "i O JANUARY 1986 c; 7 - SCH# 85052903 PREPARED FOR: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY i OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES 354 SOUTH SPRING STREET- SUITE 800 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90013 [213) 977-1600 CONTACT PERSON: ILEANA LIEL PREPARED BY: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES. INC. CONTACT PERSON; BRUCE CAMPBELL 760 HARRISON STREET ESA SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94107 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES {4151 896-S900 $ I This Environmental Impact Report was prepared by . Environmental Science Associates, Inc., San Francisco, California, to conform to the California Environmental Quality Act and State Guidelines for its implementation. ESA has applied its best efforts to prepare an inclusive informational document that identifies and evaluates possible environmental impacts and possible measures to mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed project, and considers alternatives to the o project as proposed. _ f ■■ This report is intended to be a full disclosure document i and is provided solely to assist in the evaluation of the proposed project. ESA shall not be liable for costs or > damages of any client or third parties caused by use of this document for any other purposes, or for such costs or damages of any client or third parties caused by delay 5 or termination of any project due to judicial or •£~ administrative action, whether or not such action is 2 based on the form or content of this report or portion C thereof prepared by ESA. o' *0 O ^ v. ; ( ERRATA ( i The following text is added following the fourth paragraph on p. 47 of the Draft EIR (immediately preceedirig "IMPACT"): - "Parking "Much of Hollywood was developed prior to the adoption of current code parking requirements. Consequently, many of the existing uses lack adequate parking, and the distribution of parking facilities within the project area is poor. Current parking conditions are discussed in a market study prepared by Kotin, Regan, and Mouchly, ’ and in-the 1980 parking study prepared for the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation by Associated Parking Consultants!; these* studies are on file with CRA." The following text is added following the second paragraph on p. 56 of the Draft EIR O (immediately proceeding "Cumulative"): D "Parking "Development in the commercial core would most probably occur on sites currently used for surface parking. A reduction of existing parking in commercial and D residential areas could affect the marketability of space and, therefore, affect reinvestment in older buildings. As the Redevelopment Plan were implemented, CRA and the City of Los Angeles would need to ensure the availability of parking facilities for existing uses." t y The following text replaces the discussion of specific development projects on p. 56 of the Draft EIR: 'Specific Development Projects' The development of certain sites within the project area could result in project-specific transportation impacts.- These environmental impacts would be discussed further in the environmental assessment for specific projects. For example, subsequent environmental review of specific development projects would be ■ necessary to address the issue of replacement of parking facilities for existing uses, in addition to the provision of new parking capacity for new development." V, / XT" ( V. / Hollywood redevelopment project eir TABLE OF CONTENTS r'- Page S. SUMMARY S-l I. INTRODUCTION I A. Previous Planning Activities 1 B. Redevelopment Process 2 C. EIR Preparation 2 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5 A. Project Objectives and Project Background 5 B. Project Area Location and Characteristics 6 C- Project Description 12 n D. Required Approval Actions and Uses of the EIR 16 w** HI. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION 18 D . A. Land Use and Planning . 18 D B. Historic, Cultural, and Architectural Resources . 36 c. Transportation, Circulation, and Parking 44 3 D. Meteorology and Air Quality ■ 58 E. Noise ■ ' 69 F. Energy . 73 G. Public Services and Utilities 76 5. H. Geology and Seismology 89 > IV. IMPACT OVERVIEW 99 A. Growth-Inducing Impacts . 99 i B. Cumulative Impacts 99 C. Significant Unavoidable Environmental Effects 99 D. Short-Term Uses Versus Long-Term Productivity 100 E. Irreversible Adverse Changes 100 F. Effects Found Not to be Significant 100 V. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT 101 A. No-Project, No-Development Alternative 101 B. No-Project, Development Under the Community Plan 102 C. Revision of Hollywood Community Plan 105 D. Community Plan-Consistent Alternative 113 VI. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON DRAFT EIR AND AGENCY RESPONSES 122 VII. REPORT PREPARATION; PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 205 VIII. DISTRIBUTION LIST 206 3 IX. APPENDICES A-l „.. .v' \ l 11 f 1; A, TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES S-l Alternatives Evaluation Matrix S-8 1. Existing Land Use Distribution in the Redevelopment Area, by Sub-Are a 8 2. Gross Floor Areas of Existing Uses in the Redevelopment Area, by Sub-Area, for Proposed Land Use and Density : 9 3. Land Area and Employment by Business Type 11 4. Owner- and Renter-Occupied Units by Sub-Area 11 y 5. Potential New Development in the Redevelopment Area, by Sub-Area, for Proposed Land Use and Density Change Area 16 D 6. Projected Development in the Redevelopment Area . 16 2 Distribution of Existing Residential and Commercial 2 7. Uses, by Sub-Area 19 8. Existing and Potential Development Total 26 9. Existing Traffic Levels of Service 49 3 10. Average Weekday Trip Generation Rates 52 D 11. Year 2005 Levels of Service Without Improvements 54 u 12. Hollywood Air Pollutant Summary, 1979-1983 . 61 13. Estimated Pollutant Emissions in 1985 63 14. Projected Pollutant Emissions in 2005 66 15. CO Concentrations on Selected Street Segments in the Project Area 67 16. Noise Compatibility Standards, by Land Use Category 69 17. Typical Commercial/Industrial Construction Noise Levels 70 18. Peak-Hour Noise Levels on Selected Streets in the Project Area 71 19. Estimated Total Energy Consumption for Project Area ‘ 74 20. Additional Student Enrollment Attributable to the Project 82 21. Increase in Peak Load in Land Use Change / Density Change Areas 84 22. Future Electricity Consumption in Land Use/Density Change Areas 84 iii (; V , f TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 23. Increase in Natural Gas Consumption 85 ( •• 24. Increase in Demand for Domestic Water (gallons/day) 85 25. Increase in Sewage Flows (gallons/day) 86 26. Increase in Solid Waste Generation (pounds/day) 87 27. Potential Increase in Community Services Demands at Build-Out 104 28. Potential Land Uses in the Redevelopment Area at Build-out Under Revised Hollywood Community • Plan, by Sub-Area 107 29. Development in the Project Area 108 Ijfc. * ■ 30. Additional Student Enrollment at Build Out Ill O 31. Development Potential in the Redevelopment Area at Build Out 114 under Alternative D, by Sub-Area O 3 Page LIST OF FIGURES t "S 1. Project Vicinity and Regional Location 3 2. Project Area and Sub-Areas 7 3. Proposed Hollywood Redevelopment Project 14 > 4. Historic Hollywood and Architectural Resource Map 41 5. Existing Afternoon Peak-Hour Levels of Service 48 6. Existing Bus Routes 50 7. Existing, Future and Project Daily Traffic Volumes 53 8. Projected Afternoon Peak-Hour Levels of Service 55 9. Fault Traces and Fault Safety Zones in Project Area 91 10. Land Use Differences Between Alternative B and Project 106 .11. Land Use Differences Between Alternative C and, . Existing Community Plan 115 i iv / s.: r \ V, S. SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION (see Section I) In 1983, the Los Angeles City Council requested that Community Redevelopment'Agency (CRA) prepare a redevelopment plan for an 1,100-acre area in Hollywood. The intent of the proposed Hollywood Redevelopment Plan is to upgrade the environment of the . affected areas by rehabilitating existing residences and businesses; developing additional housing;'encouraging new commercial and industrial development; providing a basis for programming public service, parks, and recreational facilities; and providing for well-planned pedestrian and vehicular circulation and adequate parking, coordinated with land use. In an Initial Study of the proposed Redevelopment Plan, prepared in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, CRA determined that an Environmental Impact Report on the Redevelopment Plan was required. O f*SY According to the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR on a redevelopment project shall be treated as a program EIR, and all public and private activities pursuant to a o redevelopment plan constitute a single project. Program EIRs are appropriate where the poject is a series of related actions as part of a contingency program (see Section l.C, EIR Preparation); advantages of a program EIR compared with a project-specific EIR include better consideration of cumulative impacts and a more thorough treatment of impacts and alternatives. Program EIRs avoid reconsideration of basic policy issues. An EIR is an informational document that does not determine whether a project will be approved. Its 3,- f purpose is to identify significant impacts of a project on the physical environment, identify measures to mitigate those impacts, and evaluate feasible alternatives. ; II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (see Section II) The Redevelopment Area project area is the older portion of Hollywood, an area generally bounded by La Brea Ave. on the west; Serrano Ave. on the east; Franklin Ave., the Hollywood Freeway, and Hollywood Blvd. on the north; and Fountain Ave. and Santa Monica Blvd. on the south. The project aiea encompasses residential, commercial, public, and industrial development that is generally low in scale. Within the project area lie several major north-south and east-west thoroughfares, including Sunset Blvd., Western Ave., Vine St., and Highland Ave. The project area has a substantially larger proportion of overcrowded housing units, low-income residents and families below the poverty level than the citywide averages for these factors.